University of Stavanger

Eating disorders (ED) do not fully respond to current empirically supported treatments and treatment attrition is significant. One reason is that the comorbidity between ED and personality disorders (PD) has not been sufficiently considered, although it is frequent and poses treatment challenges. The clinical case papers included in this virtual issue of the Journal of Clinical Psychology: In Session dealt with this problem from different theoretical perspectives. All of them tried to address the comorbidity between ED and personality pathology through integrative interventions with positive outcomes on both domains. Patients suffered from different ED and PD diagnoses and each paper showed how the clinician adopted an individually tailored case formulation leading to personalized treatments as early as during the initial assessment. A common thread among the different approaches was a constant attention to ruptures in the therapeutic relationship and efforts at repairing it when necessary. Reasoning on the cases described alongside the introductory literature overview, we suggest that addressing PD is necessary, as focusing only on ED symptoms may partially fail, leave the patient vulnerable to relapse or increase dropout risk. The contribution of individualized case descriptions, as shown in this issue, may lead to adapt ED-focused treatment to deal with comorbid PD traits or full-blown PD when present. This together with addressing common underlying dynamics and skills training could contribute to the much needed improved in treatment attendance and efficacy among ED sufferers.

• We conduct a systematic comparison of hydrogen risk assessment frameworks in Norway. • Key similarities and differences between the various frameworks are highlighted. • The paper reveals significant conceptual and methodological differences. • The implications of regulatory fragmentation for hydrogen safety are discussed. • Recommendations for harmonizing hydrogen risk assessment practice are provided. The transition towards hydrogen as a sustainable energy carrier has increased the focus on ensuring its safe implementation across various applications. A key instrument to obtain a satisfactory level of safety is adherence to regulatory frameworks and guidelines. However, the hydrogen industry faces a complex landscape of various frameworks and guidelines from different regulatory bodies. This complexity could result in inconsistent practices for hydrogen safety across sectors, such as maritime, transportation systems and industry. In Norway, this issue is exemplified by the differing frameworks and guidelines set by the Norwegian Ocean Industry Authority (Havtil), the Norwegian Maritime Authority (NMA) and the Norwegian Directorate for Civil Protection (DSB). In this paper, we present a qualitative comparative analysis of existing risk analysis frameworks and guidelines referred to by the aforementioned Norwegian regulatory bodies. The main purpose is to examine the key principles, methodologies and approaches, highlighting potential differences and conflicts in regulatory expectations. The findings reveal significant differences when it comes to how the frameworks define fundamental concepts, integrate human and organizational factors, address uncertainty and knowledge aspects and establish principles for risk evaluation and acceptance. These variations have implications for the coherence and suitability of risk assessment practices for hydrogen systems and activities. The paper concludes with recommendations to enhance the coherence and consistency of safety practices within the hydrogen sector, with the aim of facilitating a safer and more efficient adoption of hydrogen technologies across industries.

ABSTRACT In societal security, cross-sector cooperation is commonly described as a temporary response to extraordinary circumstances, where each organisation acts within its sector to address a shared, sector-spanning problem. However, many critical infrastructures and societal functions are sustained by permanent cooperation under ordinary circumstances, and organisations frequently operate beyond their sector boundaries. Yet, there are no analytic frameworks that address this variety in modes of cooperation. This perpetuates a limited scope, present in both practical coordination of and research on societal security. This article’s main objective is to develop an analytic framework that contributes to a better understanding of the diversity in interorganisational cross-sector cooperation in a societal security context. The framework draws on systems theory and interorganisational relationship studies, applying the “boundary” concept to highlight distinguishing features of various modes of cooperation. The features are explored in relation to the societal security problem, the interorganisational activity and the societal security system-of-systems. The framework’s applicability is tested in two cases of interorganisational cooperation in the geopolitically significant Svalbard archipelago. We identify three dimensions that distinguish between modes of cooperation: the extraordinariness of the problem, the duration of cooperation, and whether the contribution is within or outside the actors’ sector.

Introduction This article investigates the tension between policy ambitions for diversity and the structural barriers as experienced and perceived by migrants in accessing teaching professions in Norway. Despite official discourse emphasising diversity and inclusion and an urgent need for qualified teachers, our analysis reveals a recurring contradiction that we conceptualise as the Open Demand / Closed Pathways Paradox . While policy frameworks champion openness to diversity and research highlights the benefits of a more diversified teaching staff, the institutional pathways through which migrants can enter and remain in the teaching profession are experienced as narrow, bureaucratic, and linguistically exclusive. We suggest that this paradox reflects a broader tension within welfare-state inclusion, where efforts to promote openness coexist with procedural mechanisms that effect closure. Methods Drawing on ten in-depth interviews with institutional actors, migrant teachers and teacher educators, and intermediary organisations, the article examines how mechanisms of recognition, admission, language, conversion and retention are understood and navigated by those engaging with teacher education pathways. Results Recognition systems often provide formal evaluation of foreign credentials, yet in regulated professions such as teaching this recognition does not automatically translate – in practice – into access to employment or further qualification pathways. Discussion In addressing the Open Demand / Closed Pathways Paradox , the article introduces the concept of credential nationalism to capture how national qualification systems regulate professional belonging with the aim of quality assurance. The study contributes to debates on diversity governance, professional recognition, and the politics of belonging in higher education.

Dichotomous thinking also known as “black-and-white” and “all-or-nothing” thinking is a common cognitive distortion in which one sees things in absolute extremes without any middle ground. Not only does this bias distort reality and lead to interpersonal conflicts, but it also hinders problem solving. In the Geosciences, this bias is the source of a > 100 years old divide between tectonicists, i.e., early supporters of Continental Drift Theory (e.g., Alfred Wegener, Alexander du Toit), and paleontologists, who argued for (now sunken) land bridges between the continents based on similar fossil records (e.g., Charles Schuchert, John Gregory, Hermann von Ihering, Bailey Willis). Despite explaining the similar fossil record on continents now separated by oceans, Land Bridge Theory implied continental fixity. It was therefore completely abandoned in the 60–70s with the growing body of evidence supporting continent motion. Continental Drift Theory was then fully accepted without any middle ground despite the fossil record suggesting prolonged connection between the continents at specific localities. Possible causes for the black-or-white approach of the Geoscience community include (1) simplicity: easier to envision one hypothesis being right rather than a compromise of both, (2) guilt: Alfred Wegener had died in Greenland in 1931 only to be proven right 30 years later upon acceptance of continent motion, and (3) a feeling of inferiority amongst paleontologists and feeling of superiority (i.e., feeling of inferiority in disguise) amongst tectonicists upon demonstrating continental motion.Since then, paleontologists have explored new hypotheses to explain the migration of species at times when oceans are believed to have fully separated the continents, e.g., migration of primates from western Africa to South America and of lizards the other way around in the Oligocene. A hypothesis under testing involves floating vegetation islands rafting the species as small groups of individuals across the ocean. This hypothesis implies that enough individuals survived the crossing, i.e., enough food and/or quick journey, and found one another upon landing.Neither the new hypotheses nor the old ones take into account all the evidence, e.g., microcontinents along major transform faults (e.g., Romanche and St Paul fault zones) and correlation of all former land bridges with major transform faults and rift-oblique orogens on the adjacent margins (e.g., Central African Orogen in western Africa and Sergipano Belt in northeastern Brazil). Orogenic Bridge Theory reconciles these with both continent motion and the fossil record. Orogenic bridges are ribbons of continental crust transected by orogenic structures highly oblique to the active rift. These structures are unsuitably oriented to thin the crust and thus hinder rifting, delay breakup, and control the formation of major transform faults and elongated microcontinents. Orogenic bridges have the potential to form prolonged land connections between the continents while oceanic crustal domains form on either side, thus further allowing the spreading of terrestrial species while hindering that of marine species. This illustrates the need for more multidisciplinary collaboration across the geosciences. Creating a more flexible community that is both inclusive and mindful of diversity is key to enhance collaboration.

Artikkelen drøfter om faktum og privatrettslig klassifisering av dette kan settes til side basert på et ulovfestet tilordningsprinsipp.

ABSTRACT The Classroom Assessment Scoring System–Secondary (CLASS‐S) is a widely used observation instrument. However, it is important to gain knowledge whether the instrument is applicable in its specific context. This study investigates the applicability of the CLASS‐S in Norwegian upper secondary schools. The sample included 95 upper secondary school teachers and their classes from two counties and 12 different schools, including both academic and vocational track classrooms (1342 students). During one school year, the teachers video‐recorded their teaching seven times; these videos were scored by certified raters of the CLASS‐S. Given the nested data, two‐level models were tested. Results supported the original three‐factor structure of the CLASS‐S (emotional support, classroom organisation, and instructional support) when the instructional learning formats dimension was modelled exclusively at the between‐level. Reliability tests revealed good overall item, scale, and interrater reliability values. Some evidence was found between emotional support, classroom organisation, and instructional support, and study track and teacher characteristics. The current study supports the applicability of the CLASS‐S in upper secondary schools in Norway.